I'm completely new to this site, so I apologize if something similar has already been posted here, but here goes:

Are there any straight men out there that like the idea of having a gay sub in their control? I love the idea of a man who is straight and thus doesn't think of me as a sexual partner keeping me as a slave or as a pet.

I wouldn't say it's an impossibility - anything is possible in some way or another, and I can see this happening.
But I wouldn't chase it to the point of excluding other opportunities when they come knocking though. Keep yourself open for other ideas and such as they come.

If you're talking about someone who is completely straight, as opposed to bi-sexual, or pan-sexual, the possibility of finding someone like that diminishes rather quickly.

We're still talking about slave/pet from a BDSM perspective, which means there is some sexual connotation... So the mere thought that a straight Dom/Master would take you on as a pet/slave, means he would have to question his own sexuality.

But that then leads to a much more complicated discussion of "what is your own sexuality".

Here's a summary statement from Kinsey;
“Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats…The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects."

You might find a straight master who was willing to accept domestic service from you, and might reward that service with discipline, but most straight masters are probably more interested in receiving service from a female sub. And you might be able to find a straight master who will do a one-off scene with you.

What is this fantasy based in? Is it about the humiliation of serving someone who's not attracted to you at all?

"We hurt the ones we love the most. It's a subtle form of compliment."

Pansexual in the sense that I'm blind to gender or gender related issues when it comes to Service and similar issues. Is that "right" enough for you?

Click to expand...

I don't think he was trying to be rude, Stvstvns, or dictate what's 'right'. I think he was confused by the way you used 'pansexual'. I'm not sure there is such a thing as pansexual about non-sexual activity', but I get what you're referring to.

"We hurt the ones we love the most. It's a subtle form of compliment."

I think you're reading a lot more into his comments than is there. As I read him, he's saying that a master who identifies as straight is unlikely to went a slave or pet of the same sex, because those are by nature sexualized roles, and straight masters generally don't want slaves of the same sex. Note that his comment presupposes a master who is completely straight (the 'if' in the previous sentence). He's not saying that no straight master would do this, only that a master who identifies as completely straight is unlikely to do this ("the possibility...diminishes quickly"). Now, you can, and should, disagree if you think that straight masters are willing to take gay slaves--your own example is reasonable evidence--but that doesn't mean he's trying to belittle masters who are less than totally straight. I think he's just saying it will be hard to find one who will. And I think that's something that
Shy needs to hear. What he's looking for _is_ a little unusual.

One of the things I've learned from watching arguments erupt on the Internet is that it's important to not take offense unless absolutely necessary, because how communication operates on the internet is quite different from how it operates in person. You're reading L8's words, but not you're not getting his intonation, his body language and other critical elements of communication. His actual words are only about 7% of his communication. Had you heard him say that in person, you probably would have been able to figure out more of what he meant. Boiled down to writing posted in a hurry, it's extremely important when reading something that upsets you to ask yourself "Is there any way I might have misconstrued his post?" and if the answer is yes, then assume you did misconstrue and ask for clarification. If, after clarification, the thought is still offensive, then call him on it. In other words, give people the benefit of the doubt until they remove it.

As a gay man, I notice homophobic stuff pretty easily. In all my interactions with L8, I've never noticed anything I thought was homophobic or otherwise inappropriate.

"We hurt the ones we love the most. It's a subtle form of compliment."

One of the things I like about this forum is that the members here usually ask for a little more clarification before the teardown starts.

I will not hijack shy's first post to argue with you.... but I will respond.

You don't know me. You don't know where I've been or what I've done.
What you might know is that I have commented on two of the 10 or so posts you've had here, including your first one about ten days ago. Neither of them was judgmental, self-serving, or placed to hear myself speak.
My impression was that we are here to share ideas and experiences. Not tear each other down.

I don't know you. My perception of you can only come from reading your posts, and, yes, questioning stuff that doesn't seem to make sense, as I did with you. I am well aware that you might have been able to clear it up, but did you really think that no one would look at what you wrote and go "huh?
Your response was Napoleonic.

What I said about Kinsey and the scale was an attempt to demonstrate that we are not all black or white, vanilla or kinky, but a mixture, for the most part, of a lot of different things along a continuum.
This is why what shy was looking for was not impossible.

I still stand by what I said, and if I find that I offended shy in any way, I will apologize, explain, or both.

Wish you had given me the choice too.

I'll state the obvious here.... If you don't like me or what I say, you do have the option of never responding to me.

And yes, sebastian, I think a large part of it has to do with the humiliation of serving someone who's not attracted to me at all. I think a lot of it has to do with being viewed as an object rather than a partner. I have a fetish related to BDSM called macrophilia (see coiledfist.org) in which I imagine being shrunk to only a few inches tall. I would be completely at the mercy of whoever found me, gay or straight. I like the idea though, of just being a piece of property to a man, rather than a boyfriend/lover/etc.

stvstvns, you do seem to be what I'm looking for. A straight man who doesn't care what gender/etc. someone is that serves as his property.

interesting. I am a gay-slave, and I serve my Master mostly as a house-maid, butler, human furniture, etc. but there is always sexual attraction involved (as I am to be naked at all times). Our relationship is confined to two people, but sometimes we experiment. Once I was presented to my Master's friend (a straight man). The humiliation of being naked and on your knees in front of someone who isn't going to use you as a sex slut was really humiliating. He allowed me to clean his shoes and be his footstool, but didn't want to touch me and even tried to avoid looking at me. Therefore I believe that straight master having a male sub is unlikely

Not so, I say again.
Mostly because I'm in that very position for now
I'll grant that sex isn't likely to be high on the list - but I hadn't really counted on it being there.
Call me strange, but knowing that, I'm more interested in the serving part this time round.